Affiliation:
1. Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, Canada
2. Free University of Bozen-Bolzano, Bolzano, Italy
Abstract
Scholarly peer review is crucial to science: it not only determines what is published where, but also, indirectly, who is hired, funded and promoted. Yet, virtually every academic has peer review horror stories. Empirical evidence suggests that "peer review is prejudiced, capricious, inefficient, ineffective, and generally unscientific" [1]. An experiment at a major machine learning conference found that peer review was unreliable highlighted that the outcome of peer review can be very noisy [2, 3].
In May 2019, ACM SIGSOFT launched an initiative to improve the quality of research papers and peer reviews at software engineering venues. It has two main components: empirical standards and recommendations for improving review processes.
Publisher
Association for Computing Machinery (ACM)
Cited by
10 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献